Jeff Knott is RSPB's Head of Nature Policy. Here he shares his own personal perspective on the decision to walk away from Defra's Hen Harrier Action Plan.
It’s always disappointing when you invest a lot of your time and energy into something and it doesn’t work out as you’d hoped. Whether it’s work, sports or relationships; nothing stings quite as much as the disappointment of unfulfilled potential.
The Hen Harrier Action Plan, created under Defra’s Upland Stakeholder Forum has been like that for me and has had a bit of all three. The potential of a positive opportunity. The misplaced optimism of an England football campaign. And ultimately the disappointing realisation that it’s just not working out.
Four years. That is, to coin a technical phrase, a bloody long time! Four years ago we were gearing up for the London Olympics – seems an age ago doesn’t it?
But four years is also how long discussions went on to try and hammer out an agreement that all parties could agree on and that most importantly, would deliver the recovery of hen harriers. I was the RSPB representative in most of those meetings. While discussion was often difficult and debate was usually forthright, it did feel like there was potential. Getting everyone – conservationists, shooters, landowners, the Government - around a table to try to agree on how to save England’s hen harriers (and only that) was always going to be challenging, but it was a prize worth fighting for. And that’s what kept me going through years of meetings.
When the plan was published earlier this year, we welcomed it. Not because it was perfect – it wasn’t (but then I’d argue no compromise agreement ever is) – but because it represented the potential for progress. Unfortunately, that potential has proved to be as fleeting and as unfulfilled as that of Roy Hodgson’s men at Euro 2016.
I’m not going to repeat the evidence for the lack of progress. For that, give Martin Harper’s excellent blog from last Monday a read. It is clear that the opportunity the action plan presented has not been grasped. The events of this season have made it abundantly clear that the people I spent years sitting round tables with are unable to deliver the real changes we need to see on the ground. And when it’s clear a partnership can’t deliver what it needs to, then it’s time to separate.
And let’s be abundantly clear. The action plan has not failed to deliver because of the RSPB. It has failed to deliver because illegal killing has not ended and hen harriers remain in danger.
What’s my over-riding sentiment to this? Anger? Depression? Disappointment?
No – its determination.
Determination that this will be the last failed process. Determination that we will all, especially law-abiding shooting estates, grasp the real opportunity presented by licensing. Determination that we will continue to work with partners on the ground to protect the birds. Determination that we will save our hen harriers.
And licensing really does offer an opportunity. It’s not a blanket approach, but targeted specifically at driving up standards. Progressives in the shooting community should be looking to embrace licensing as a way to identify and marginalise illegality and bad practice. There are plenty out there calling for a total ban on driven grouse shooting. Over 64,000 have signed this petition. For me, taking licensing seriously provides the grouse shooting industry with an option to avoid the failure of the Hen Harrier Action Plan being seen as another milestone on the way to ever increasing calls for an outright ban on driven grouse shooting and the land use and practices that support it. It’s an opportunity they mustn't let slip by.
Have I wasted the last four years working on an action plan that has failed entirely? I don’t think so. Because much like failure in sports, in relationships, indeed in life, with hen harriers if we learn the lessons and move forward to achieve our goals in the future, ultimately it will all be worth it.
If you share my determination, please attend one of the upcoming Hen Harrier Day events on 6th/7th August and, if you live in Scotland, sign this petition supporting calls for licensing.
Posting on behalf of Jeff Knott...
Hi Keith,
Apologies for brevity, but I'm on my phone and struggling with technology (ok, more struggling with my technological ineptness)!
Good to see the Chief Exec of Songbird Survival taking an interest in hen harriers.
On lack of progress, as explained in Martin's blog, fewer hen harriers than last year and ongoing incidents lead us to believe no progress has been made and indicate a lack of willingness to change voluntarily.
On what happens now, we will focus on what we always have done, before, during and after the plan – trying to protect the birds on the ground. Our Hen Harrier LIFE Project was and is continuing to deliver on the first four points of the Action Plan.
On licensing specifically, we published some principles about 2 years ago on Martin's blog and will be more to come. In the meantime I look forward to law abiding estates and responsible organisations accepting that there are real problems to be addressed and championing licensing as a way to drive up standards.
Finally, as I said here, I invested more in this plan than most, but I'm now convinced it cannot deliver, so it’s time to try a different approach.
Look forward to seeing you at hen harrier day next weekend!
Jeff
Interesting personal perspective Jeff.
Here’s a member and volunteer’s perspective. When an organisation like the RSPB signs up to a long-term plan, after 4 years of negotiation and deliberations, it is not unreasonable for members to expect that organisation to give it sufficient time to produce results after plan implementation, before analysing progress and making any precipitate decisions as to the way ahead. For example, a normal multi-agency planning and action process goes something like this:
• discussion/negotiation;
• agreement;
• plan production;
• plan implementation;
• review of plan implementation results;
• plan modification;
• modified plan implementation;
• review of modified plan implementation results
…..and so on in an iterative fashion until the desired goal is achieved.
Species’ recovery plans normally take years to come to fruition, for example:
• the recolonization of UK by the osprey – one pair in 1954, 200+ pairs last year, ongoing…
• the recovery of the marsh harrier – one pair in 1971, 400+ pairs last year, ongoing…
• the reintroduction of the white-tailed eagle - commenced 1975, 100+ pairs last year, ongoing…
• the reinforcement of the red kite in UK – 100 or so pairs limited to Wales in 1989, 2500+ pairs last year, ongoing…
To give up after only 6 months, before the 1st breeding season is even complete and before a major pillar of the plan had even been attempted – the southern England reintroduction element - is not only very puzzling, but also calls into question our own commitment to seeing the Plan through to completion.
So a couple of questions:
• What ‘Measures of Success’ had our Society set for the HHAP, and over what timescales?
• What happened with the Southern England reintroduction pillar of the Plan?
• How much support has been received from other 'stakeholder' bodies for the proposed ‘Licensing Plan?’ (such as Defra, NE, Hawk & Owl Trust, GWCT etc.)
• Where can members see the details of the proposed Licensing Plan - the aim, objectives, proposed 'Measures of Success', proposed timelines, proposed parliamentary timetable for passage of enabling legislation, and so on.
I hope this decision wasn’t taken in haste, before an alternative multi-agency replacement plan was in place, for some as-yet-to-be-disclosed ‘political’ or other motive. The Conservation Director was quite clear in his blog statement of 6th June that “We also remain committed to Defra’s hen harrier action plan. It would be premature to change tack based on early returns from a late season and it is in everyone’s interest for this plan to succeed. ….. I’ll report back in September when we have a complete picture of how the year has gone.”
So, final question, how has the situation changed in the intervening 49 days between the Conservation Director’s statement of 6th June (above) and his announcement of withdrawal of support on 25th July, at least 5 weeks before his own publicly announced review point of sometime in September?